This study handled the evaluation of the agricultural extension
in Sudan. This had covered six states in the Northern Sudan
representing the main agricultural environments, which are:
(Khartoum – Al-Gazira – Sennar – Northern Kordofan –
Gedarif – River Nile). The Darfur States, were excluded
together with the Southern Sudan, because of the irregularity
of the agricultural extension services in them and the
continuation of the war.
The main objective of the study was to conduct a comprehensive
evaluation of the agriculture extension services in the studied
states, in the period 1958 – 2008. The research targeted three
sectors of those associated with the agricultural extension, to
collect the primary data. They were farmers, the agricultural
extensionists and the higher managers of the agricultural
extension services. Thus, a random sample of 322 farmers was
selected from six states together with all the agricultural field
extensionists in the 6 state because of their small number (total
number 40) Some of the specialists in agricultural extension and
research, the higher agricultural leadership, some retired
extension specialists and some local leaders, were also chosen,
through the use of the purposive sampling total number(12).
The study applied the scientific methods to process the data ..
These were the social survey method and statistical analysis.
The study was strengthened with some data from secondary
sources, such as references and related studies. The most
important findings of the study are as follows
1. The implementation of the decentralization system, led to
weakening the administration and caused the
disappearance of the administrative control, in the
agricultural extension systems.
2. The performance of agricultural extension, in the
agricultural sectors were considered unacceptable, by the
farmers, and acceptable by the administrators.
3. There was no coordination, and no institutional linkage,
between agricultural extension, the agricultural research
centers and the other relevant institutions, such as, the
cooperatives and the associations with similar activities in
the field of rural development. There is no partnership
between these institutions, and agricultural extension.
4. There were no agricultural extension aids, in 83 % of the
studied states,. It was also clear that 78% of the
agricultural extensionists felt that there is a need for
providing more and new extension aids because of the
insufficiency of the existing levels and because of the size
of work they have to perform. This had negatively affected
the performance of the extensionists and the efficency of
the extension services.
5. 95% of the extensionists stated that they were in bad need
for training to increase their theoretical and practical
knowledge and to know the most recent agricultural
innovations. In fact, it was revealed that 80% of them did
not receive training at the beginning of their service. This
proves that there is no systematic training, for the
extensionists and the officials of the agricultural extension
services
6. 93% of the agricultural extensionists, faced problems and
constraints, which curb their success.
7. 88% of the agricultural extensionsists, saw that
agricultural extension had achieved little of its objectives.
because of the weak operational resources, meager budgets,
no activation of the extension role and the neglect of the
higher extension managements of the role which
agriculture extension, can play.
8. 68% of the farmers believed that agriculture extension had
failed in performing its role, during the past period.
9. 83% of the agricultural extensionists ascertained that there
is need for adding new extension programmes and
activities, because of the insufficiency of the existing
extension programmes.
10. 83% of the studied states did not have the sufficient
number of subject matter specialists, in the middle
managerial levels.
The study recommended me following
1- Evaluation of the extension programme and the
attendence of the agricultural extensionists in the
agricultural areas, and close supervision.
2- The allocation of sufficient fund in the agricultural
extension budget, to cope with its major objectives.
3- Support of the administrative structure of agricultural
extension with qualified personal.
4- The planning of the extension projects